채무부존재확인
1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.
2. Following the counterclaim filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) at the trial.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is running the Plaintiff’s bus B (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) as a company running passenger automobile transportation business.
B. On October 5, 2015, the Defendant was waiting on the back side of the instant traffic accident (hereinafter “instant accident”) due to the Defendant’s body being driven on the back of the Plaintiff’s vehicle while leaving the Plaintiff’s vehicle in a two-lanes of the room of the kitchen, which is a driver employed by the Plaintiff, from among the two-lane roads, from the mouths of the room of the kitchen, the head of Simpo, Magl, Magrog, Simpo, Kimpo-si on the lower side of 08:30,015. The Defendant was faced with the left hand of the Plaintiff’s body.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Entry B in Evidence Nos. 1 and 4, Videos of Evidence No. 1, Results of the first instance examination, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Part on the main claim
A. 1) The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff acknowledged the fact that the defendant suffered bodily injury due to the accident of this case. However, since the injury of the Yeume, etc. claimed by the defendant is based on the defendant's king certificate without causation with the accident of this case, since there is no obligation to compensate for the above injury, the defendant's assertion that the defendant had no obligation to compensate for the damage exceeding 150,000 won against the defendant. 2) The defendant's assertion that the accident of this case occurred 5,00,000 won or more due to the damage of the king treatment expenses, future treatment expenses and consolation money due to the accident of this case, and thus, the plaintiff is obligated to pay the defendant the damages for delay from October 5, 2015 to the day of full payment.
B. According to Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (hereinafter “Life Compensation Act”), a person who operates an automobile on his/her own behalf shall be liable for damages in cases where he/she has injured another person by such operation.
The above facts and the images of Gap evidence No. 1 are examined.